2. analog
  3. 1364382162

When a Reviewer "likes" something

... what does that mean in your opinion. I read in one of the last Stereophile mags a comment from Mr. Atkinson where he wrote about the differences in "opinions" in forums or in printed mags. After all he ended with the argument, a component is good when a reviewer likes it.
Isn't is more helpful, when a reviewer knows something about a real tone reproduction? Or is it ok, when he used every month another CD or LP he got for free, a kind of music nearly no one wants to listen to?
Harry Pearson used in the 90's always the same records for his reviews but that was an exception I think.
What is it worth for you when - for example - Mr. Dudley/Fremer/Valin/HP .... "likes" something? Do you have the same "taste" they have?
I know it is possible to like a Turntable even when that unit can't hold the proper speed, or is extremely sensitive to any influences, there are endless recommendations written about such units...what is it worth for you?
Atkinson for example measures units, some have top datas but they can sound very boring, far away from the real thing, some have no top datas, some "tests" are shortened because a unit can reach a area which can be pretty dangerous (see one of the latest Agostino units, just as an example) but they are rated Class A in recommendations anyway....
When someone "knows" what is right or not, then his "liking" is only a personal opinion which is more or less uninteresting or?
Most customers (not all of course) would prefer to know what a unit is really able to do sonically, or not? Would knowledge destroy the joy of Hardware rolling? Or is there a reason why reviewers use low efficiency speakers when they have a tube amp for review (for example Lamm ML2.1/ML2.2 with Magico Speakers)? Is the matching "expensive + expensive" the proper way to show competence?
128x128syntax
rrog
1,958 posts
 
Vic, Sorry, but I don't like being called a liar.
rrog
1,958 posts
 
Rauliruegas, I enjoyed reading your post. You brought up some very good points.
manitunc
795 posts
 
Rrog,
Who called you a liar. I cant, because you dont state any verifiable facts to which the truth or falsity can be determined. Just recirculate the same rumor and innuendo.

By the way, no one deserves to be defamed, which by its very definition means to be lied about. If they are corrupt, then its not a lie. But you seem willing to defame anyone, without any factual basis. I have seen too many good people harmed by such acts from fools.

Why is so easy to believe bad things about people but not good things. Or even that they are neutral, neither good nor bad. We cant get concensus here on any subject, with all our learned members, why would you expect a reviewer, given their necessary time restraints, to do much better? This isnt the state of the union they are reporting on, or the master plan to save the world. Its just an opinion by a writer on a piece of equipment they had in their system for a period of time. Would you rather they went back to Stereo Review reporting and just regurgitated the spec sheet and say is sounds as it should? There is a reason Stereo Review no longer exists. If I want to read that kind of stuff, I will order brochures.
So any, my point is that I dont appreciate attacks on integrity based on rumor and innuendo and even now, I have not seen a single, verifiable fact against any writer for Stereophile or Absolute Sound when I have asked many times. And again, I dont read half the mag, because I am not interested in digital equipment but I do enjoy the writing of Art and Mikey, even if I dont agree with them.
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,138 posts
 
+1 Manitunc
lewm
13,101 posts
 
Dear Raul,
You wrote, "Why many audiophiles are running their systems with tube electronics? because is the best audio technology? certainly not but because was what the magazynes taught us in the past and we believe it in that way and trhough the time our ears are already equalized to that kind of electronics and it does not matters the damage level to the audio signal can do."

I like to think we are friends, but you must stop repeating this BS. Do you actually think that what you wrote is universally true? Do you think that none of us who favor tube equipment have the capacity to make an independent judgement? If you do think that way, then arguing is hopeless. I would argue that the movement toward tube gear over the last 10 or 20 years was motivated by end users who established their preferences by actually listening, after decades of having solid state foisted upon us by the mainstream audio press (just like "perfect sound forever" digital). The audio press followed the audiophiles toward tubes, not vice-versa. They saw where the trend was tending and got in front of it, not the other way around. But they still do push megabuck solid state stuff, as well, some of which may be excellent so far as I know. I try to keep an open mind. Unlike yourself. But can you admit that you may be biased because you sell an expensive solid state phonolinepreamp?

Sorry, this is off-topic, except for the part about the actions of the mainstream audio press. Were it not for independent publications like the late lamented Glass Audio and Sound Practices, tube-based equipment might have a much smaller share of the market.
More to discover